Refuting the debated and analyzing the debater.

Sheikh Mumtaz-ul-Haqq was phoned for the second time publicly by a Shi'ah brother, this time discussing the topic of Adaalat-e-Sahaaba - Justice of the Companions. Sheikh Mumtaz as usual is worried, annoyed and left heartlessly bamboozled, when the Sh'iah asks him questions, and gives him references from important Sunni scriptures. Some of the main issues picked up in the debate was the discussion regarding the event of A'isha saying to Rasool-ul-Allah you smell of Maghafeer. This and the establishment of Surah Tahreem in the Quran too. 

The Shi'ah goes on to discuss the virtues of the Companions in the based foundation that not all the 100000 companions of the Prophet (saws) would go to Heaven, rather are promised Heaven. In this article, we will see and analyse further points which were discussed, and in all honesty clearly see some of the key features which weren't examined fully and not even touched by our Shi'ah brother - in all honesty! There was a point in between the discussion which the Sheikh raised with great authority, he presented Surah Al-Fath's verse number 1 and 2, regarding the fact that this serves as a proof, that Rasool-ul-Allah (saws) once was a sinner, through the understanding of the verse. 

Now obviously this isn't true at all, we true Shias believe that Prophet Muhammed (saws) was never a sinner, and was a Ma'soom (Innocent), and can never sin, but on this issue raised by the Sheikh, our brother Shia caller in all honesty did stutter. That is why once someone really clever said this;

Before letting the opponent talk, make sure there is nothing left for him to talk but to admit and admire. - Mao Tse Tsung

But anyway, we insh'allah, will now focus on this point raised by the Shi'ah caller of A'isha calling Prophet (saws) something untrue, rather, claiming something to him which isn't true at all. Before we go anywhere, we need to highlight this word Maghafeer, I hope everyone is aware of this word fully, otherwise notifying the Hadith is useless.

We read in Fath-ul-Baari Bi- Sharha Saheeh Bukhari - فتح لبآريي بشرح صحيح بخاري - Al-Barraak Edition, Tayba Institution, Volume 12:

"Maghafeer is the plural of Mughfoor, and the Mughfoor is a nasty smelling sweet gum...and it is collected from the bushes that are used to feed camels."

In another tradition, it's called Urfut, let's see in the same book what Urfut means;

"Urfut is the tree who's gum is known as Maghafeer." 

So we should now practically know what this thing Maghafeer is, for more info on this, refer to the excellent article by RevisitingTheSalaf team here at Section 1.

Moving on, what would you do to a person if he/she calls your mother something unimaginable and horrible? Strike back with the same words? Attack physically? Insult back and crossing the limits? Or, ignore? What do you think? What do you think happens when the master of this world is called something which he truly doesn't deserve? You expect thunderous reply! And angry gesture! A ruthless slap! A kind and a thoughtful procession of ignoring such lunacy! What?!"""£$
In all honesty, it isn't nice to say to a person anyway, that you stink or smell of some sort! Does A'isha require some manners to be taught here or what? This is such a huge accusation, that even the Bible rejects the unbelieving wives of Rasool-ul-Allah's claims! We will look at this later on. But or right now, we have an established fact that Maghafeer doesn't smell nice, at all! And just in case anyone hesitates to even claim this whole event of A'isha and Hafsah calling Prophet (saws) something bad, lets see what Tafseer Ibn Katheer has for us regarding the Tafseer of Surah Tahreem (Ch. 66).

You can read the full Tafseer of this Surah on that website, and see for yourself the reality of this event. It'clear and explicit. Before we go any further, I want to ask a question, in that screenshot, at the very bottom it says;

﴿إِن تَتُوبَآ إِلَى اللَّهِ فَقَدْ صَغَتْ قُلُوبُكُمَا﴾

(If you both turn in repentance to Allah, your hearts are indeed so inclined;) in reference to `A'ishah and Hafsah.

Did A'isha and Hafsah then repent? If they did, where is its mentioning in any authentic Hadith or even in the Quran? 

This is something which should have been the victim or absolute concentration and questioning, this is not any issue, this is Rasool-ul-Allah and his respect which we are talking about. Anyway, as I mentioned, even the Bible, refutes A'isha' hideous claim, we read in the Old Testament Song of Solomon, Chapter 5, verse 16:

"Hikko Mamittakim we kullo Muhammadim Zehdoodeh wa Zehraee Bayna Jerusalem."

"His mouth is most sweet: yea, he is altogether lovely. This is my beloved, and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem."  

This verse is reasonably accepted as a clear proof for the evidence of the mentioning of Prophet Muhammed (saws) in the Bible. Now, I'm not here to discuss this with the Non-Muslim phase right now, but this certainly will be in another post. But just have a look at what the verse says, His mouth is most sweet! Unbelievable is it not dear readers? I'll leave all the comments of your's to be the value of utter dignity for the claim of A'isha regarding Rasool-ul-Allah rejected by even the Bible! This should have at least been a victim of hint all in all in the discussion with the Sheikh... At least...

Turn to precisely 3:40

At this point, the Sheikh makes a lunatic event to actually say that the smell wasn't coming from Rasool-ul-Allah, but from something he had eaten. Now that we and the Sheikh know that the Oder of Maghafeer is not nice, he defends his mother through making a hideous claim and purely performing Qiyaas by saying the thing he (saws) had consumed (i.e. what the wives thought) was bad, not Rasool-ul-Allah. But again, as we saw in Tafseer Ibn Katheer, how can this;

smell unpleasant?

It's a basic question to be asked and answered, how on earth does Honey smell bad, honey is superb! Isn't it? Unless the Sheikh's mother gives a radical Fatwa of course... I'm pretty sure someth

ing fishy is going about... Again, this was an unbelievably foolish act by the Sheikh, and this must have been a down town thunder blast by our Shi'ah caller, that's a peach! These two points mentioned here absolutely murder the Sheikh's defense, yet he still continues to bark about the smell not being from the Prophet, but something he had eaten. Now what the Prophet had eaten has been examined through the Tafseer of Ibn Katheer, Honey, who in the world thinks honey has a bad smell, only Sheikh Mumtaz and his mother A'isha, otherwise he would've been the first to break his fast quietly with a jar of honey in the toilet! Anyway, he says that, and is rebutted by the Sh'iah caller through the reference of Saheeh Bukhari, Vol. 7, Book 63, Hadeeth no. 193,  that in the start of the narration, A'isha says to Raool-ul-Allah what is this bad smell which I smell from you and later on in the same narration, it goes on to say pretty much the same thing; what is this bad smell which I detect on you. This is a fine objection raised by the Shi'ah caller, it's clear and explicit, that A'isha is stating to the Prophet (saws) of the bad smell, this refutes the Sheikh in 3 points;

• It was a bad smell.
• The smell isn't attributed to the thing which Rasool-ul-Allah had drank/eaten.
• Whatever he had drank/eaten which A'isha accused of making Rasool-ul-Allah smell, wasn't smelling at all, it was honey - and this point has been emphasized. 

Turn to precisely 5:25

At this point, yet again, in all honesty, the Sheikh picks up a good point, for once in his debates we are publicly witnessed to, but this point is invalidated to humility later on by some fantastic weaponry Ahadith - which our Shi'ah caller, yet again in all honesty, utterly fails to respond and stutter. The Sheikh presents Surah Al-Fath's verses 1-2 to show, well, hang on Mr, you are saying A'isha and Hafsah made some sins and mistakes, so did Rasool-ul-Allah (God forbid), as in the Quran, Allah states;

لِيَغْفِرَ لَكَ اللَّهُ مَا تَقَدَّمَ مِن ذَنبِكَ وَمَا تَأَخَّرَ وَيُتِمَّ نِعْمَتَهُ عَلَيْكَ وَيَهْدِيَكَ صِرَاطًا مُّسْتَقِيمًا {2 

048:002 Khan

:

That Allah may forgive you your sins of the past and the future, and complete His Favour on you, and guide you on the Straight Path;048:002 Maulana

:

That Allah may cover for thee thy (alleged) shortcomings in the past and those to come, and complete his favour to thee and guide thee on a right path,048:002 Pickthal

:

That Allah may forgive thee of thy sin that which is past and that which is to come, and may perfect His favour unto thee, and may guide thee on a right path,048:002 Rashad

:

Whereby GOD forgives your past sins, as well as future sins, and perfects His blessings upon you, and guides you in a straight path.048:002 Sarwar

:

so that God will redeem the sins (which the pagans think you have committed against them) in the past or (you will commit) in the future. He will complete His favors to you, guide you to the right path,048:002 Shakir

:

That Allah may forgive your community their past faults and those to follow and complete His favor to you and keep you on a right way,048:002 Sherali

:

That ALLAH may cover up for thee thy shortcomings, past and future, and that HE may complete HIS favour upon thee on a right path;048:002 Yusufali

:

That Allah may forgive thee thy faults of the past and those to follow; fulfil His favour to thee; and guide thee on the Straight Way;

The Sheikh at this point really highlights the word ذَنبِكَ and tries to bring the attention of the Shi'ah caller here. Though this is marginally out of the context of the debate, we can still shut anyone up, as we are the knowledgeable ones, and try to become even more knowledgeable! Anyhow, I would like you to play the video call further on, and see for yourselves that there was hardly any strong reply to this actually very good claim from a very stupid man, which obviously we will prove stupid after all... 

Regarding this we have several Ahadith in authentic Shi'ah books, with Isnaad (chain of transmission). Let's see;

و ذكر الحديث، إلى أن قال: «و قد قال النبي (صلى الله عليه و آله) لعلي (عليه السلام): يا علي، إن الله تبارك و تعالى حملني ذنوب شيعتك ثم غفرها لي، و ذلك قوله عز و جل: لِيَغْفِرَ لَكَ اللَّهُ ما تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِكَ وَ ما تَأَخَّرَ».

And mentioned the Hadeeth, until he^asws said: ‘And the Prophet^sawwsaid to Ali^asws : ‘O Ali^asws ! Allah^azwjBlessed and High Burdened me^saww with the sins of your^asws Shias, then Forgave them for me^saww, and these are the Words of the Mighty and Majestic [48:2] That Allah may Forgive you what has preceded from your sins and what is to follow’.[1]

علي بن إبراهيم: حدثنا محمد بن جعفر، قال: حدثنا محمد بن أحمد، عن محمد بن الحسين، عن علي بن النعمان، عن علي بن أيوب، عن عمر بن يزيد بياع السابري، قال: قلت لأبي عبد الله (عليه السلام): قول الله في كتابه: لِيَغْفِرَ لَكَ اللَّهُ ما تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِكَ وَ ما تَأَخَّرَ، قال: «ما كان له ذنب، و لا هم بذنب، و لكن الله حمله ذنوب شيعته ثم غفرها له».

Ali Bin Ibrahim, from Muhammad Bin Ja’far, from Muhammad Bin Ahmad, from Muhammad Bin Al-Husayn, from Ali Bin Al-No’man, from Ali Bin Ayoub, from Umar Bin Yazeed who said,

‘I said to Abu Abdullah^asws , ‘(What about) the Words of Allah^azwjin His^azwj Book [48:2] That Allah may Forgive you what has preceded from your sins and what is to follow. He^asws said: ‘There was no sin on him^saww, nor was he^sawwwith a sin, but Allah^azwj burdened him^saww with the sins of his^sawwShias, then Forgave them for his^saww sake’.[2]

قال شرف الدين النجفي: و يؤيده ما روي مرفوعا عن أبي الحسن الثالث (عليه السلام): أنه سئل عن قول الله عز و جل: لِيَغْفِرَ لَكَ اللَّهُ ما تَقَدَّمَ مِنْ ذَنْبِكَ وَ ما تَأَخَّرَ، فقال (عليه السلام): و أي ذنب كان لرسول الله (صلى الله عليه و آله) متقدما أو متأخرا؟ و إنما حمله الله ذنوب شيعة علي (عليه السلام)، من مضى منهم و من بقي، ثم غفرها له».

Sharaf Al-Deen Al-Najafi said,

‘And it is supported by what has been reported from Abu Al-Hassan^asws the Third having said about the Words of Allah^azwj Mighty and Majestic [48:2] That Allah may Forgive you what has preceded from your sins and what is to follow, so he^asws said: ‘And which sin was committed by Rasool-Allah^saww, before or after?’But rather, Allah^azwj Burdened him^saww with the sins of the Shias of Ali^asws , from the past among them and the ones who remain, then Forgave them on his^sawwbehalf’.[3]

الطبرسي: روى المفضل بن عمر، عن الصادق (عليه السلام)، قال: سأله رجل، عن هذه الآية، فقال:«و الله ما كان له ذنب، و لكن الله سبحانه ضمن له أن يغفر ذنوب شيعة علي (عليه السلام) ما تقدم من ذنبهم و ما تأخر».

Al-Tabarsy – It has been reported by Al-MufazzAl-Bin Umar,

‘A man asked Al-Sadiq^asws about this Verse, so he^asws said: ‘By Allah^azwj,there was no sin for him^saww, but Allah^azwj the Glorious, Guaranteed him^sawwthat He^azwj would Forgive the sins of the Shias of Ali^asws , whatever had preceded from their sins and whatever is to follow’.[4]

---

[1] علل الشرائع: 173/ 1.

[2] تفسير القمّي 2: 314.

[3] تأويل الآيات 2: 593/ 4.

[4] مجمع البيان 9: 168.  

These serve as a brilliant proof, that Prophet (saws) did not sin, as well as that fact that he is Ma'soom. This is obviously by the Shi'ah perspective, but for those Nawasib, whom degrade Rasool-ul-Allah (saws), there is a place in hell for them... This was a point which our Shi'ah caller seriously struggled on - in all honesty, just saying and reminding the Sheikh of staying on the line and path of the topic isn't enough - you need to debate at any angle if you can. 

But even again, on this point, the Sheikh says that Allah will forgive Prophet's sins, but will Allah forgive the sins of his wives? Especially A'isha, for sure there is the mentioning of Rasool-ul-Allah's so called sins (Belief) forgiven, but will Allah forgive the sin which A'isha done? Come on man, you could have at least shed some light on that!! I would say to our brother Shi'ah caller;

"You're jumping the guns too much..."

The Sheikh even says the wrong chapter number, it's chapter 48 - Surah Al-Fath of Quran, not 49, 49 is Surah Hujraat.

Important concluding point:
I'm highly sorry if someone find my article a bit un-friendly, but hay, Guys! This was the reality which should have been the case in the discussed debate. And to this act of A'isha, there should have been the discussion of some of the actual acts of the Companions, what they did, before converting, what they did after converting to Islam (especially secretly under the watchful eye of Prophet Muhammed), what they did after Rasool-ul-Allah (saws) died, and what were their moral characteristics in regards to inspiration and ethics. For example, when you study the life of Umer ibn-Al-Kahattab, there were several cases, where he said some absolute rubbish, where he killed the daughter of the Prophet, where he and his friend Abu Bakr didn't do justice with Fatima Zahra (sa) in regards of Fadak... And much more... I believe this was an issue leading to many more, and probably the biggest one of this issues would have been the Fadak matter, where Fatima Zahra (sa) denied here property... 

We can all learn from what we did not know - Mao Tse Tsung       

Imam Hussain (as)'s blood was everywhere...

Brief signs of Imam Hussain (as) displayed by naturalisation.

Article By: Raees Mustafa

Introduction;

Assalamu Alaykum – Dear brothers, 10^th Muharram is a poisonous day for a disbeliever, and he wants to do anything he can, to make the day of mourning of a believer, be dreadful. Though really, I don't get it, when some Shias do perform this, they end up (God forbid) being attacked by Lunatics, by Infidels. What they don't understand is that they should start bombing or attacking per the history recently, to such natural objects, which are hard to even explain how they are doing this, and even harder, why should we do this or that to them.

Don't get confused, I'm like it, in other words, the worlds of Allah mourn for Imam Hussain (as), the natural sources cry and weep for Imam Hussain (as) and so does the Prophet (saws), try calling him (saws) an infidel huh? They wont, because this will automatically enable them to become one! Just to shorten it up, my 8^th article discusses nothing but questions to be asked and questions to be answered, I hope you find the article informative.

Who else cried for Hussain (as) other than Shias?

Al-Bidayah Wal-Nihayah, Vol. 2 – Book written by Al-Hafidh Imadul-Deen Abil Fidaa Ismaeel ibn Umer ibn Katheer Al-Qurashi Al-Damishqi (who dies approximately around 773 A.H). This particular book which I'm referring to you is investigated by Dr. Abdullah Abdul Muhsin At-Turki. A'lam Al-Kutub Institution for copying and publishing. As mentioned, in Vol. 2, p 573 of this particular publication, we read;

“Qaalal Imam Ahmed: Hadathanaa Abdur-Rahman wa Affaan, Hadathanaa Hammaad ibn-Salama, An Ammar ibn Abi Ammar, An Ibn Abbase Qaala: Ra'aytun-Nabee (s) Fil Manaam Bi Nasfin-Nahaar. Ash'asa Aghbar. Ma'ahoo Qaaroorah Fee-haa Damun, Faqulto: Be Abee Anta wa Ummee Yaa Rasool-ul-Allah, Maa Haadha? Qaala: Haadha Dam-ul-Hussaine wa Ashaabeyhee. Lam Azal Al-Taqitohoo Munzul Youm. Qaala Amaar: Fa Ahsaynaa Dhaalika-al-Youm, Fawajadnaahoo Qad Qotila Fee Dhaalika-al Youm.”

Isnaado-hoo Qawiyun! “And Imam Ahmed said: Abdurahman and Affan told us, Hammad ibn Salama reported from Ammar ibn Abi Ammar, who reported from Ibn Abbas, who said: I saw the Prophet (saws) in my dream during mid-day. He was dusty and dishevelled and he was holding a bottle of blood. I said: Let my mother and father be sacrificed for you 'O Messenger of Allah, what is this? He (Prophet) said: This is the blood of Hussain and his companions. This is the blood of Hussain and his companions. I have been collecting it since today. Ammar said: We memorised that day and then we found that he (Hussain) was killed on the same date.” The chain of narration is strong!

The Prophet (saws) is seen in the middle of a day, in the land of Hejaz, carrying a bottle of blood. What is the chance you'll everyone, see a report, so fascinating as this one, containing the witnessing of the Messenger of Allah (saws) in someone's dream? And there would be a lot of accusations upon that Hadeeth being fabricated too, as per some Scholars. But I guess, whom on earth is here an Alim bigger than Ibn Katheer in this modern time, to argue Ibn Katheer on his recording of this report in Al-Nihaya? Just have a look at what Prophet (saws) said, this is the blood of Hussein and his companions! So Rasool-ul-Allah is giving special importance to not only Imam Hussain (as)'s bloodshed, but also his noble companions too! To those who think companions are the ones to only have lived during the lifetime of Prophet (saws) are wrong! These are what you call Companions mate!

But hang on, let's ask a question, what is Prophet (saws) doing in the middle of the day collecting blood, moreover, this isn't making any sense at all to me, how does Prophet (saws) know Hussain (as)'s death info? Well, let's begin by answering the last question first, Prophet (saws) knows everything, he is the master of the world, and is the greatest human being ever, he knows what happened and what didn't happen! Secondly, moving on, Prophet (saws) through the submission of the hadeeth, is on the day of Hussain (as)'s death date, this is 10^th Muharram, and after the dream was seen, calculations were done regarding Prophet (saws) coming into the dream, and they figured out that Imam Hussain (as) died.

This goes to show the magnificence of the day of Ashoora, and the fact that how Prophet (saws) also commemorates and mourns over the death of his beloved grandson Imam Hussain (as).

We read in the Musnad of Imam Al-Humble, Vol. 4, investigated by Sho'aib Al-Arna'oot and Adil Murshid. Vol. 4, p 59 – the thing which I'm going to report to you is repeated on page 336 as well. We read;

An Ibn Abbase Qaala: Ra'aytun-Nabee (s) Fil Manaam Bi Nasfin-Nahaar. Ash'asa Aghbar. Ma'ahoo Qaaroorah Fee-haa Damun Yal-Taqitohoo Aou Yatatabahoo fee haa Shay'an. Qala: Qulto Ya Rasool-ul-Allah Maa Haadha? Haadha Damun Hussaine wa Ashabeyhee Lam Azal Al-Taqitohoo Munzul Youm. Qaala Amaar: Fa Ahsaynaa Dhaalika-al-Youm, Fawajadnaahoo Qad Qotila Fee Dhaalika-al Youm.”

Isnaadohoo Qawiyun Alaa Sharte Muslim. From Ibn Abbas: I saw the Prophet (saws) in my dream during the mid-day and he was dishevelled and dusty. He was holding a bottle which contained the blood, or he was collecting something. I said: O Messenger of Allah, what is this? He replied: The blood of Hussain and his companions, and I have been collecting it since day-time. Ammar said: We memorized this day, and we found out that he (Imam Hussain) was killed on that day. The Chain of narration is strong according to the conditions of Muslim.

Quiet amazing isn't it, it's worth mentioning what Sho'aib Al-Arna'oot said regarding its chain of narration further;

At-Tabarani narrated this in Hadeeth No. 2822 and 12837, Al-Hakim Al-Nisapouri narrated it in Mustadrak Vol. 4, p 397-398 from Hammad ibn Salama with this chain. Al-Hakim further authenticated it according to the conditions also set by Muslim, and Al-Dhahabi agreed with them too.

The Prophet (saws) on the day of Ashoora is collecting the blood of Imam Hussain (as), if you see this somewhat from an understanding angle, it's shocking that Hussain (as) is already dead, yet Rasool-ul-Allah is doing something mentally and physically impossible. We should remember, that this is within the dream, and within the dream Prophet of the earth comes down from Heaven, what is supposed, to collect the blood of Hussain, to mourn over Hussain, what did you do last Ashoora? Or for the year before, or even before? Whatever you did, I hope you followed the Sunnah, by collecting or shedding at least some tears compared to the act of Prophet (saws).

Now let's refer to another book, Majma Az-Zawa'id wa Manba'Al-Fawa'id, written by Al-Haythami al-Misri (807 A.H). Narration No. 15159, it states: The narration is;

Wa An-iz-Zuhri Qaala: Qaala Abdul Malik: Ayo Waahidin Anta in A'lamtanee, Aya Alaamatin Kaanat youma qatlal Hussain. Faqaala Qulto: Lam Turfa' Hasaatun Bey Bayt-il-Maqdis. Illa wojida Dahtahaa damun Abeet.

Arwaa'a hut-Tabarani wa Rijaalohoo Thiqaat. From Az-Zuhri wo said: Adul Malik said: What a person (great person) you are if you told me what sign there was on the day Hussain was killed. I said: There was not a single stone that was lifted at Bayt-ul-Muqqadas unless they found blood flowing underneath it. At-Tabarani narrated this and mentioned the narrators to be trustworthy.

This is a cosmological debate which needs understanding, look at the relation between the blood of Hussain (as) and the bleeding of the stones in Bayt-ul-Muqqadas. This tells us a spiritual motion of God in play, this tells us the magnificence of Hussain (as) rather, that even when Hussain (as) was many a mile away, the stones wept and knowing he was butchered in the land of Karbala by Yazidi Shias! Let's go onto the narration No. 15160;

Wa Aniz-Zuhri, Qaala: Maa rofi'a Bi-Shaamey Hajarun Youma Qatl-e-Al-Hussain ibn Ali, Illa Andam.

Wa-Arwaahu-Tabarani Rijaalohoo Rijal As-Saheeh From Az-Zuhri who said: No stone was lifted on the day Hussain Ibn Ali was killed, except, they found blood underneath it. Narrated by At-Tabarani and the narrators are the narrators of Saheeh (i.e. Saheeh Bukhari and Muslim).

So from another narration from Az-Zuhri, we find that not only stones at Bayt-al-Muqadas were bleeding tears for Hussain (as), no! There were all stones, to which there was a naturally established fact by God, to weep blood over Hussain (as)! If stones can do, why can't your hearts, the quran addresses to people whom have stone hearts, to follow Allah and his way, following Allah means completing, doing and fulfilling every aspect of his command, if stones can weep, why can't those even with the stone hearts?

As mentioned before, this is cosmological view, and a disturbing phase for those, whom don't like to hear the truth. It is I'm afraid, how the world is sometimes run...

And let's site yet another narration shall we, Hadeeth No. 15161, we read;

Qaala: Lamma Qotilal Hussain Ibn Ali, In-kasafat-As-Shams Kasfatan Hattaa Badat-al-Kawaakibo Nasfan-Nahaar. Hattaa Zanannaa Anna haa hiya.

When Hussain ibn Ali was killed, the sun eclipsed, and other planets appeared in the mid-day. Until we thought that was it! (Day of Judgement).

What is this? You may ask, and rightly so, when truth was in the so called hibernation under the pits of ignorance. At least that is what when you come over conclusions like these, that the murder of Hussain was bad, incredibly bad, veraciously bad! And Hussain (as) himself was unbelievably good! Incredibly good, spectacularly awesome! The planets appeared dear viewers, the planets! They came to mourn, the whole system is changing, since when did you see all the planets come at the same time, and mourn over Hussain (as)!

Really, we can go on and on, commenting on this with great logic, but really, it's up to you now to decide, which option is the best, sit down on the 10^th Muharram, and see out of your window Shias mourning, and start to curse them, or go out there by yourself, and mourn like what planets and stones did, at least they know something...

Meanwhile, as usual;

O Allah, forgive us all, for our bad sins.

How the Prophet cursed Banu Ummayah and their people!

___________________

How the Prophet cursed Banu Ummayah and their people!

Article By: Raees Mustafa

Introduction:

Assalamu Alaykum

Dear readers, this, by the graciousness of Allah, is my 6^th successful article published, through sincere hard work, and research, not for the cause of mentioning upon grabbing attention, or showing off, of course not, I don't believe in that, and neither do believe in what the sons and the daughters of followers of Banu Ummayah did, done and are doing, for their Islam. It's a pleasure to be at the service of our 12^th Imam, and guide people, or show the path of Mukhlasin.

In this article, we go through the undiscovered, and the sank, disappeared Sunnah of the Prophet, which was cursing Banu Ummayah, Marwaan Ibn Hakam (especially) and their generation. The so called Sunnis, try to perform the Sunnah of the Prophet, right? But don't always match up to the reality, and neither do they every want to.

Sunni books are specified in this piece of text, which examine, how and exactly when the Prophet of Islam, Muhammed (saws) cursed this clan. And upon for what reasons, are they hated by Shia's! I hope you enjoy the article. There are questions to be asked, and questions to be... answered!

بِسۡمِ ٱللهِ ٱلرَّحۡمَـٰنِ ٱلرَّحِيمِ

Kind Regards

Raees Mustafa

Banu Ummayah hated the names of AhlulBayt Imams and especially “Ali”

Siyaral A'lam al-Nubala written by Imam Dhahabi, states in Vol. 5, p 101, of the book published fro Al-Risala institution. Biography number is 35 – Ulay bin Rabah;

Imam Dhabai states: He is a trustworthy Imam. Abu Musa al-Lakhmi al-Misri heard narrations from Amr ibn Al-Aas and he heard from Uqba ibn Amir and he from Abi Qatada al-Ansari, and he from Abdullah ibn Umer and he from group of companions.

Then he goes on to state on page 102:

...And he is from the greatest Scholars of Tabi'een. Abu Abdurahman Al-Murqi said whenever the Banu Ummayah would hear that a new born baby was named Ali, they would kill him!

Right, Banu Ummayah would kill the person for not being a follower of Ali, but for just having the name Ali! What hate, is this what Banu Ummayah are respected for? This is what Imam Dhahabi has mentioned in his book, Siyar A'lam, a highly well known publication. We further read on the same page of the book:

So when this reached (the news of murder of anyone who's name was even Ali), Rabah (father of Ulay) changed his name from Ali to “Ulay”.

Do you see the name connectivity between “Ali” and “Ulay”? There is some mess up in the name as it shows.

Siyar A'laam Al-Nubala, Vol. 10, p 400 – Biography of Allama Al-Hafidh Al-Sadiq Abul-Hassan Al-Madaa'ini. The book states about him:

He came to Baghdad and put a classification and he was very good in biographies, battle stories and lineages of Arab tales. He was honest in what he said with a high (saheeh – authentic) chain of narration.

Now let's turn to page 402:

Al-Madaa'ini narrated that he entered upon Ma'moon and mentioned to him the narrations about Ali. So he (Ma'moon) cursed Banu Ummayah. Al-Muthana ibn Abdillah Al-Ansari said: I was in Shaam (Syria) and I never heard the names Ali nor Hassan. But rather all I heard was Mu'awiah and Yazeed and Al-Waleed.

Banu Ummayah wanted to erase even the name of Ali, forget the followers, the names of Ali, Hassan and Hussain (likewise of the AhlulBayt). Is this what Banu Ummayah and their clan is so well known and respected for? They wanted to remove this name from the Islamic history, society and never let this name be alive! What was Imam Ali (as)'s (in particular) fault, with his sons and family? Just because they followed Prophet Muhammed (saws). That's all, though we encounter something else too;

Same book: Siyar A'lam Al-Nubala Vol. 10, p 402 (same page, but further historical info below) – Al-Madaa'ini further narrates;

Then I went past a man standing at his door, who ordered his son (Hassan) to fetch him water. I said: You named him Hassan?

So he said: My children are called Hassan and Hussain and Ja'far, because the people of Shaam (Syria) name their children after the Caliphs of Allah.

And then the man cursed his son.

So I said: I thought you were the best from among the people of Shaam (Syria), but I realised there will be nobody who is worse than you Hell fire!

So Ma'mun said: Never mind, that is why Allah curses their alive and dead people. He meant the Nawasib!

MY GOD!

They used to name their sons Hassan, Hussain and Ja'far etc... so they could curse them! And guess what, that same Sunni Alim in his well known Sunni book says the narration from Madaa'ini, mentioning “Caliphs of Allah”! We over here have come across another huge point everyone, Hassan, Hussain, Ali and further Masoomeen of Shia sect, are the Caliphs of Allah! And the one who goes against the Caliphs of Allah is not a Muslim!

What truth! Is this what Islam teaches us? No, but Kufr, the ultimate enemy of Islam, these people are of the lineage of Pagans dear readers, Mu'awiah, and Banu Ummayah, they still had a stitch of idol worshipping within them, and never ever really submitted their will to Allah and his Prophet's religion truly! Never ever! And that's what the big bearded illiterates wont teach you!

If the Banu Ummayah was so bad, and against the Prophet and Allah, how comes the Prophet never said anything bad about them? Well, let's see what the Prophet had said about such a clan of Ummayah!

The Prophet cursing Banu Ummayah!

Al-Matalib Al-Aaliya Biz'a'waa'id al-Masaaneed al-Thamaaniya - an incredibly well known book written by Hafiz Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani. Vol. 18, p 257 of the book states:

And just have a look at this title of the chapter everyone, it's not me saying what I want to, but it's:

Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani

it's

Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani

it's

Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani

Yes, Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani dear readers, one of the head clans of Banu Ummayah! Not me quoting this on my Eiman's behalf, but Ibn Hajar himself. Let's see, what he has just named the title of the chapter in Vol. 18, p 257:

Chapter of Rasullulah cursing al-Hakam ibn Abil-Aas and his sons and Banu Ummayah!

Amazing! The title tells us everything about what the chapter is based upon! I'm repeating again, this isn't me saying this, but Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani!

Who is Prophet Muhammed (saws) cursing? It's

• Banu Ummayah
• Marwaan Ibn Hakam
• And the progeny of Banu Ummayah!

Prophet Muhamed (sas) is cursing, why can't we? It's a question to be asked and a question to be answered!

We read a few pages further in the same book, same volume at Hadith No. 4455;

It's related from Abi Yahya, who said: I was with al-Hassan and al-Hussain, and Marwaan cursed Al-Hussain!

Dear readers, I'm saying this over and over, it's not me saying this, but Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani, the chief head of Banu Ummayah! What did he say, he writes in his book a narration from Abi Yahya, whom narrates that Marwaan cursed Al-Hussain! Those who say Marwaan was good and a fine companion, is found cursing Al-Imam Al-Hussain (as), for whom the Prophet (saws) has been mentioned saying through some reporters;

Al-Naysaboorie quoted abu-Hazim and abu-Hurayra as saying: “ I saw the Messenger carrying al-Husayn son of ‘Alee and saying, “ O Allah, I love him, so love him”.References:

Al-Hakim described this Hadith’s ascription as credible but both of them did not publicize it, Mostadrak al-Saheehayn Ch.3 p.185. The same hadith was narrated mentioning al-Hasan instead; both are found, Mostadrak al-Saheehayn Ch.3 p.195.

Amazing, whom Allah and the Prophet love, someone else is cursing him! Are you telling me through the analyses of your faith, that Marwaan, and Banu Ummayah's untold stories are better and have more value that Allah and the Prophet's laid foundational Deen (religion)? If you are, I'm sorry to label you as an infidel! Marwaan, whom Sunnis portray as a great Caliph, and a companion of the Prophet, is cursing someone whom upon we read:

Al-Hakim ascribed this Hadith to abu-Horayra: “ The Prophet came out to us with al-Hasan and al-Husayn on his shoulders, kissing them alternatively until he came to the point where we were standing; a man then said, “ O Messenger of God, do you love them? He replied, “ Yes, whosoever loves them has loved me and whosoever hates them has hated me”.References:

Mostadrak al-Saheehayn Ch.3 p.182/Al-Bidaya Wa al-Nihaya Ch.8 p.35, 205.

So Marwaan therefore hates Prophet Muhammed (saws), as he hates Imam Hussain (as)! And this isn't me saying dear readers, it's

Ibn Hajar Al-Asqalaani

We further read dear readers: (same Hadith Number)

Marwaan said: Let the AhlulBayt be cursed! So Al-Hussain got angry and said: Are you cursing the AhlulBayt? For By Allah, Prophet of Allah cursed you while you were in your father's loins!

Imam Hussain (as) dear readers is saying that Prophet Muhammed (saws) cursed whom? Marwaan whilst he was in his father's loins! So Prophet Muhammed (saws) knew what kind of a person this man was, and what he will be! These are questions to be asked, and questions to be answered dear viewers!

The investigator of this book is Abdul-Qadir Abd-il-Aziz jawandal, who says:

This Hadeeth is Saheeh, as per the narrators within this chain of narration, are all trustworthy and authentic! And this has been mentioned by

• Al Haythami
• Busairi
• And is written by Abu Yo'la
• Ibn Katheer

etc...

Dear viewers, what else would you want? These are questions to be asked, and questions to be answered!... (I just love saying that).

“Swear to God that Prophet cursed Banu Ummayah” - Yes, somone did swear to God;

We read in Tareekh-ul-Islam wa Wafiat Al-Mashaheer wal-A'laam by Imam Dhahabi. Book edited by Br Bashar Awaad Ma'roof Al-Gharb Al-Islami Institution. The one which I'm referring to you is from the 3^rd Edition published in 2003. In Vol. 2, page 200 of this book, we read:

Al-Shay'bi said: I heard Ibn Zubair say: I swear by Lord of this house (Ka'ba), that verily Al-Hakam ibn Abil-Aas and his sons are cursed by the tongue of Prophet Muhammed (saws)!

Pay close attention to the footnote of this hadeeth, Dhahabi says it is Saheeh, all the narrators in this chain are authentic! Dear readers, that was a brief covering of the greatest era, as primarily due to the fact that Prophet Muhammed (saws) lived in it, and that Prophet of Allah, cursed Marwaan Ibn Hakam from his own tongue, and also Banu Ummayah and their sons! He cursed the most evil clan in Hejaz, if not, the world! He cursed what deserved to be. Another question arriving is that Banu Ummayah included Mu'awiah, and in the previous articles I published (which you can get the link from below), have examined his character, and clearly have stated (the books of Ahl-e-Sunnah), what kind of a person he was, and Prophet (saws) even went on to order his killing if he is seen upon my pulpit!

There are thousands of ore evidences for Mu'awiah and Banu Ummayah's character examination providing the family of Kufr. In fact, we even have some ahadith, which claim Mu'awiah being announced as the enemy of Islam, by Prophet Muhammed (saws) himself. And I don't see why conversion to a different faith seems a good idea after all.

As mentioned, my intention isn't to harm any view of any faith with rude, stupid and a foolish way, but in fact guide and bring people to the path of Mukhlasin and provide even more info of the religion, so pagans aren't existing tampering it.

2 sentenced Conclusion:

O Allah, forgive us all for our bad sins...

__________________________________Can you “actually” Handle the truth?

Link to Mu'awiah's hate for Ali: http://www.scribd.com/doc/138842239/Mu-Awiah-s-Hate-for-Ali

Link to Mu'awiah and some more devastating facts you didn't know: http://www.scribd.com/doc/139718487/Mu-awiah-and-some-more-devastating-facts

Refuting Sheikh Mumtaz-ul-Haqq!

A'isha is a controversial character in the history of Muslims. She is either good, or bad, or extremely bad. By some views, we only see destruction and hate, and from the other, knowledgeable arguments and great philosophical attributes of history presented. In this short clip, we sight an amazing reference from Imam Hambal's Musnad, quoting a narration of Prophet (saws), narrated by Abdullah Ibn Umer, that Prophet (saws) pointed at the house of A'isha, and called out Fitnah thrice. 

That is the narration from Abdullah Ibn Umer in Musnad of Ahmed Ibn Hambal, but as well as that, we see the very same narration of Prophet (saws) in Bukhari too! 

Sahih al-Bukhari Hadith: 4.336
Narrated Abdullah:

The Prophet stood up and delivered a sermon, and pointed to the house of Aisha, and said: "Fitna (trouble/sedition) is right here," saying three times, "from where the side of the Satan's head comes out."

Umer's Bid'at ends up in the Fajr's Adhaan

[This was the direct article available here on the new blog, of Raees Mustafa, providing viewers a better opportunity, to just see exactly how much of a liar Umer was, and his Bid'at]

                       

“Salah is better than sleep”

Article By: Raees Mustafa

1

Introduction

Shias and Sunnis have many differences that are speculated carefully, whether that be the Wilayat of Ali, or the Prostration upon Earth, we just can't sit down and come to a decision together. Or is it? To be honest, it's more of gaining knowledge, than abusing and exposing someone, and Shias try their best not to be rude in that way, or become a total out-cast of that exposing example. Shias and Sunnis have different views to numerous topics, regarding Salah and of course its rules and regulations.

What this article looks to cover is the very famous and mischivious topic of the phrase:

“Salah is better than sleep”

Which was said by Hazrat Umer to a man whom came to wake him up for the Salah of Fajr, Hazrat Umer was sleeping, as mentioned, and the person came forward to say the above phrase: Assalatu Khayrum-min-Al-Naum – Salah is better than sleep.

When Hazrat Umer heard him and woke up, he ordered the person to add this into the Adhaan (and per some narrations) into the Salah itself.

This is regarded as Bid'at, not from my words, but from the words of Imam Malik, Imam Shaf'i, and Ali Mutaqi Hindi, whom are regarded as some of the pillars of the Sunni School of thought, and are respected from head to toe... It's not our fault they quote Hazrat Umer's began Bid'at, and also it's not our fault, that they mention this, yet nowadays Sunni Muftis deny that with such rudness...

Nonetheless, by the will of Allah, I've produced an article on this topic, and its confussions, with a great amount of Sunni books, and have also reported this attribution to the one of a Bid'ati, not from my words, but from Hazrat Umer's own son's. It's up to you to now take that piece of knowledge, and see for yourself, who'se right and who's wrong...

2

Sunni references

Mota of Imam Malik, Vol. 1, page 90 (Published from Karachi) states:

Imam Malik has told that to him this talk reached, that a person came to Hazrat Umer, to inform him the Salah of fajr's time is here. The person saw that Hazrat Umer was sleeping, and went closer to him to say: Salah is better than sleep.

Hazrat Umer in reply said: Add that phrase: Salah is better than sleep in the Adhaan. So as I'm sleeping, others sleeping will also wake up.

Tanweer-ul-Mumajad, Alaa Mota Imam Muhammed page 36

Molana Ataa-ullah, who was the student of Molana Muhammed Hussain Muhadis, has translated this in urdu, and has analysed it as well. He has written this narration:

A person came to Hazrat Umer, he was sleeping, and said: Salah is better than sleep, Hazrat Umer informed him to add this into Adhaan.

It further states: Some people say that and also say: Hayya Alaa Khyaril Amal, Molana Ata'ullah writes, Hayya Alaa Khyaril Amal to be added in Azaan is Sunnat-e-Muhammed (saws).(1)

Further states:

It's Abullah Ibn Umer's call, that it's Sunnat to add it in Adhaan (Hayya Alaa Khayril Amal), though some don't believe it that he done it from Sunnat-e-Muhammed, but it's quite clear, that he read it, and may have read it most certainly from the intention of that being the Sunnat of the Prophet (saws). So to act upon that, there is no problem!

He has mentioned Mota Imam Malik's version of this incident, though hasn't commented anything upon that...

All Hanafi Ulama never ever deny the above book, of Muhammed bin Hassan Shibani, and say he is 100% authentic.

Gami'il Usool Min Ahadith-r-rasool, Vol. 6, page: 197, book By Ibn Atheer Gadri, also refers to Mota Imam Malik, but he never commented anything about its narration.

This also states clearly, the very same narration, that a person came to Hazrat Umer, and asked him to pray the Fajr, he was sleeping, and heard the person said: Salah is better than sleep, Umer in reply said: Add this phrase in the Adhaan.

Sharh of Mota Imam Malik, called Tanweer-ul-Haqaaliq – Sharh gul-Imam Malik.

Sharh-ho-huu Tanweer-ul-Haqaaliq, Mota Imam Malik.

Motal Imam-e-Malik's Sharh, authored by Allama Jallaludin Sayuti, Vol.1 page: 70

3

____________________________

1. – Molana Ata'ullah has written in his book, that reciting Hayya Alaa Khayril Amal in the Adhaan in Sunnat-e-Muhammed, and how Shias read is absolutely correct accordingly to the true Sunnah, and your own authentic book!

Imam Jallaludin says the same incident from Mota Imam Malik, but doesn't comment on it, as this is the Sharh, of the whole book. Nonetheless, he also says, that once a person was reading Adhaan in Syria, when Mu'awiah entered, and, within the adhaan that person says: Assalamu Alayka Yaa Ameer. As in adressing to Mu'awiah.

Imam Sayuti writes, this Bid'at began during the times of Mu'awiah.

If someone can send salaam upon such a person, can't we give salaams in the Adhaan upon the greatest personality after Prophet Muhammed (saws), Ali? Yes we can, and we have every write to do so... (2)

On this page he writes the same incident, but doesn't refer to or mention or comment on Imam Malik's narration.

Another Sharh of Mota Imam Malik, Sharh Zarqani, a very famous Sharh of Mota Imam Malik, he is the Imam of Ahl-e-Sunnat, page 221, has mentioned the same version of the incident, of Mota Imam Malik, he has reffered to the version of the incident in Mota Imam Malik, but hasn't said this is Zaeef. And says: In reality, it was Hazrat Umer, who began this work of adding: Salah is better than Sleep in the Adhaan.

Seerat Ibn Halbiyah e Ali Ibn Burahanuddin Halbiy, Vol. 2, page 96;

On this page he mentions the very same version of the incident, but didn't comment on it or refer it (to Mota Imam Malik's). And he mentions this with authority, that it was Hazrat Umer, who began the addition of: Salah is better than Sleep, in the Adhaan of Fajr.

Another Sharh of Mota Imam Malik, Mussafa Mussawa Sharh-a-Mota. And this is the best Sharh of Mota Imam Malik. On its cover says: Hujjatullah hay Alal Alameen Shah Waliyullah Muhadis Dhelvi.(3)

Shah Walyullah Muhadis Dhelvi, has reffered to Mota Imam Malik, and says: a person came to Hazrat Umer, and said: It's time for Namaz. Hazrat Umer was sleeping, so he went closer and said: Salah is better than sleep. Hazrat Umer said: Add this into the Adhaan.

He writes further:

Therefore, it's mustahab, to add this phrase: Namaz is better than sleep, in the Adhaan, twice.

He then analysis Mota Imam Malik's view, and also his own, that it was Hazrat Umer, the first person, to state this, and make this an addition into the Adhaan.

Allah's Hujjat, upon all the worlds, says that Hazrat Umer added this in the Adhaan, now shall we listen to these housemade Alims, or from him? As the front cover of the book states?

4

Another Sharh of Mota Imam Malik, Aujazul-Masaalik Ilaa Mota Malik, this book is written by Shaykh-ul-Hadees, Molana Muhammed Zakariya Mohajir Madani, Vol. 1, page 192

____________________________

2. – Inshallah- I will produce an article where I ptove the Imamate of Imam Ali (as) from Quran, and also Sunni Tafaseer, that it's wajib!
3. – Such titles are Haram for Non-Ma'sum, and certainly will be punsihed in the hereafter...

He writes the reference of Mota Imam Malik, and says clearly, it was him (Umer) who started this Bid'at. And then writes something very interesting, Mohajir Madani writes:

The Adhaan which came, revealed from the Sky was different, and didn't include the phrase: Salah is better than sleep. But this came afterwards, later, and as early morning, is the time to pray, and some sleep, some Sahaba denied this Bid'at! And said Prophet Muhammed (saws) never ever recited this! This is Bid'at!

Mohajir Madani further writes:

It's well known from Imam Ali (as), and also from Hazrat Tawoos, that this phrase, and its addition into the Adhaan is falsehood and came later.

And this incident is also mentioned by Imam Shaukaani in his book Nehlul Autar with detail.

This is on the page 192 of the book Aujazul-Masaalik, mentioning the reference of Imam Shaukani's book too... That the Adhaan, which came from the sky, wasn't or didn't icnlude this.

Another absolute gem of a Sharh of Mota Imam Malik, written by Molana Ishfaq-ur-Rahman Kandelvi Deobandi

The author is a Hanafi Scholar, and in his book on page 57 has narrated an inch perfect incident of Hazrat Umer's encounter with this man, and says clearly, that Hazrat Umer's adittioned Adhaan, with the phrase: Salah is better than sleep, is absolutely wrong, and certainly isn't the Adhaan the same which was revealed from the sky, but tampered!

Al-Farooq, Shibli Nu'mani's book, Urdu publication, on page: 372 and 373 states:

Hazrat Umer's character from head to toe, what he done, how he did it, why he did it, when, was he born, every question, every speck of Hazrat Umer is covered over here in this Sunni Scholar's book. And within it, it states:

Islam never allowed 45 such things, the true Islam, but Hazrat Umer gave permission to do so, and practised it himself...!

And within those 45 wrong additions, there is one which Shibli Bu'mani states: that Hazrat Umer was the first person to give himself, and start this title: Amir Al-Mu'mineen.

Though Hazrat Abu Bakr didn't even use this title for himself...

He Shibli Nu'mani writes that Hazrat Umer done lots of work, situated Prisons, used the whipping rope, situated and organised a Police station/departement,

5

examined and signified the Usool of Qiyaas, Bajama'at-e-Namaz-e-Taraawi was formed, made it certain for 4 Takbeer's recitation at Namaz-e-Janaazah on people.

And writes one more thing: added the phrase: Salah is better than sleep in the Fajr's Adhaan!

We talked nothing from our view, absolutely nothing... And it's not up to us either to talk, as by Allah, it's the books talking these rules and regulations, false ones, formed by Hazrat Umer, not accordingly to the will of Allah... These are your books everyone!

Sunan-e-Dar Kutani, book of Dar Kutani, Vol. 1, page: 243, hadees no. 39:

He writes the narration from Anas, but doesn't take it in 100% authentic, nonetheless, that doesn't really matter, as he the author of this book mentions on this page, that when a person came unto Hazrat Umer to wake him up for Fajr prayers, he (Umer) was sleeping, and that person came forward and said to him: Salah is better than sleep.

On behalf of that, Hazrat Umer replied: Add that into the Fajr's Adhaan...

This was another reference from another Sunni Alim, very well known in their School of thought, and even he approves, that Hazrat Umer, added the phrase: Salah is better than sleep into the Fajr's Adhaan.

This referring incident, is narrated differently from Imam Malik's Mota, though at the end, comes to the cocnlusion, that really, Umer did add the phrase.

So far I've presented several books, and all of them claim clearly, that this phrase added by Hazrat Umer into the Fajr's Adhaan, is Bid'at!

Kenzul Ammal, book of Hadith, every Sunni brother approves this book, and all Hanafi Scholars approve it with authenticity.

Kenzul Ammal Fiy Sunan-e-Lakwaal, written by Allama Ali Mutaqi Hindi

He also mentions in his famous book, that Hazrat Umer did reply to the person who said to him: Salah is better than sleep, to add this phrase into the Fajr's Adhaan.

First reference from the book, Hadees No. 23250, it states:

It's a narration from Mujahid;

I was with the son of Umer, Abdullah bn Umer, we entered the Mosque, and a person was giving the Adhaan, the person giving the Adhaan said the phrase:

Salah is better than sleep

6

After hearing this, Hazrat Umer's son says: Take this Bid'at and this Bidati (person performing the Bid'at) out of the Mosque!!!

Because the Prophet Muhammed (saws) never added this into the Adhaan, via the will of Alah, he's performing such an act, which is not liked by Allah and his rasool! Take him out of the Mosque!

Now those who say that it was the granted permission and order by Prophet Muhammed (saws) to add the phrase: Salah is better than sleep in the Adhaan, are they more knowledgeble than Hazrat Umer's son? The most authentic personality in the School of Sunnism, for narrating Ahadith?

Al-Hidaday'h, page: 84, this book is written by Ahl-e-Sunnat wal-Jammat's Alim, Allama Murghi Naani. This is the book of Fiqh. Even he writes the narration in his book, he says:

Imam Ali (as) saw a man who was reciting the phrase: Salah is better than sleep. Imam Ali (as) on behalf of witnessing that said: Take this Bid'ati (person performing Bid'at) out of the Mosque!

Abdullah bn Umer said take such a person doing such a Bid'at out of the Mosque, and so did Imam Ali (as).

Second reference from Kenzul Ammal, Hadees no. 23291

It's a related from Ibn Jurrair, that Hassan bn Muslim gave me news of a person, who asked Hazrat Tawoos that when was the phrase: Salah is better than sleep, said in the Adhaan?

Hazrat Tawoos in reply said: By Allah, this phrase: Salah is better than sleep, was never ever said during the time of Prophet Muhammed (saws).

Third reference from Kenzul Ammal, this is also related from Ibn Jurrair, Hadees No. 2352;

It states that the person who came to inform Hazrat Umer of Salatul-Fajr, was Saad, and when he recited this in the Adhaan, Hazrat Umer himself said it, that it was Bid'at!!!

Now Hazrat Umer according to Sunni School of thought is Farooq-e-Azam, isn't he? Shall we listen to these nowadays Muftis, or Hazrat Umer himself, that adding the phrase: Salah is better than sleep in the Adhaan, or after the Adhaan is Bid'at or not?

Another Sunni book: Mazahir-e-Haqq, translation of Mishqaat Sharif, translated by Allama Qutubudin Khan Kalvi, page No: 586

It has got the very same narration related in Kenzul Ammal, and other books, that Imam Ali (as) and Abdullah bn Umer said it himself, that whoever recited this in his Adhaan in the mosque, take him out of the Mosque, he is a Bid'ati!

Improtant to note here is that in Mishqaat Sharif, has also mentioned that: Hazrat Abu Mahzura, said that the Prophet (saws) did order to add this phrase in the

7

Adhaan. It's important to note this, even though many more books of much higher stature deny this, those Sunni brothers will now and then come with this book to regard their view correct.

The thing is that people don't even know properly who he is, and what people have done to his narration, what is its true reality... Abu Mahzura's narration is annalysed by the author of Mishqat Sharif from the book Sunan-e- Abu-Dawood, people say there are 2 such narrations of Abu Mahzura, regarding the Prophet's order of adding this phrase into the Adhaan.

Now lets cover both of these narrations from Abu Mahzura.

First narration from Sunan-e-Dawwod, Hadees no. 500.

It states this narration from Abu Mahzura. And approves the fact that Prophet Muhammed (saws) did order to add the phrase: Salah is better than sleep in the Adhaan.

But I don't agree... (As usual)

Though lets not forget Mota Imam Malik, Imam Malik died in 150-70 (A.H), and Abu Dawood died in the 200s. Who shall we trust? The more famous book, or the less famous one? The early published one or the later one? The more elevated book or the lesser elevated one?

The person coming 100 years later says and claims that Prophet Muhammed (saws) ordered Abu Mahzura to recite this phrase: Salah is better than sleep, in the Adhaan?

What Blasphemy?

Nehlul-Autaar, book of Sunni School of thought, book of Imam Shaukani, now he died in the year 1200 (A.H), he on the page: 246 has written about the narration of Abu Mahzura:

Abu Mahzura's narration, which is recorded in Sunan-e-Abu Dawood, its reality is that within this narration recorded in Sunan-e-Abu Dawood, its sanad contains a relator called Muhammed bn Abdul Malik bn Abu Mahzura, no one in this world knows about this man, who was he, where he came from, no one knows of him...

Secondly Imam Shaukani writes:

There is another relator called Haris bn Ubaid, and many people say no one should trust him, as he lies...

Now this narration recorded in Sunan-e-Abu Dawood saying that Prophet Muhammed (saws) ordered people to recite the phrase: Salah is better than sleep, in the Adhaan, is wrong, may be written in the book, and is, there is no doubt about the book relating this incident, but its relators of the ahadith narrated by Abu Mahzura, isn't reliable, according to their own books!

Another relator is Abu Mahzura himself, and another person relating this event is Muhaddis, about him dozens of Sunni Alims and books narrate, that he was a lazy person, so his talk and information, isn't reliable... (writes Allama Shaukani in his book)

Now those reporting in return, the narration from Rasool-ul-Allah regarding the addition of this

8

phrase into the Adhaan as fine and obligatory, how comes the Sanad and the relators of this hadith narrated by Abu Mahzura from Prophet Muhammed (saws), are reported weak and lazy, from Sunni books?

There were 2 places quoting Abu Mahzura's hadith from Prophet (saws) about this phrase's addition into the Adhaan, but it turned out quite happily, that 3 of the people narrating this, were weak, and aren't to be trusted.

The second place where this even is mentioned, is the very next hadith in Sunan-e-Abu Dawood, Hadees 501 quoting this incident from Abu Mahzura's hadith from Prophet Muhammed (saws), is also mentioned as weak.

Sunan-naul Kubra, book of Imam Nasayi, Imam Nasyi died in 303 (A.H), Vol. 1, page: 499 says about the relators of Abu Mahzura's hadith from Prophet Muhammed (saws):

The whole of incident of Prophet Muhammed (saws) ordering Abu Mahzura to read this phrase: Salah is better than Salah, in the Adhaan, is weak, in fact this hadith contains a relator called Uthmaan bn Saib, him and his father are totally unreliable!......

So tell me now, would you trust Sunan-e-Abu Dawood quoting Abu Mahzura's fake hadith from Prophet Muhammed (saws) saying: Recite the phrase: Salah is better than sleep, in the Adhaan, or the Saheeh, authentic and reliable books of much elevated Sunni Alims, and the good Hassan narrators?

It's up to you to decide...

Now this is a gem of a reference, from a Sunni book, Kitabul Umm, written By Imam Shaf'i, he died in the year 204 (A.H), Vol. 1, page: 55, he writes:

I don't like the addition of the phrase: Salah is better than sleep, in the Adhaan!!!!!!!! And Abu Mahzura's Adhaan didn't include the phrase: Salah is better than sleep, in his Adhaan!!!!!!!! I say this with the witnessing of Allah recording this! And I neither like this after the Salah.

Another book: Bidayat-ul-Mujtahid wa Nihayat-ul-Muqtasid, written by Allama Ibn Rushd Qurtubi, Sunni Alim! Vol. 1, page: 77, he died in the year, 593 (A.H), and has written in his book:

You shouldn't say: Salah is better than sleep in the Adhaan! Because this phrase, is not from the natural Adhaan revealed by Allah! The Salah Prophet Muhammed (saws) taught didn't include this phrase: Salah is better than sleep. And neither did its Adhaan taught by Prophet (saws) conatin this phrase...! I'm not saying this, but Imam Shafa'i is! In this topic, I will go with Imam Shaf'i, that adding the phrase:

Salah is better than sleep

is Bid'at from head to toe!

9

The author further writes on the same page:

The confusion and bemusion of reciting this came upon due to the fact that Prophet Muhammed (saws) never recited this in his Adhaan or the Prayers, but Hazrat Umer gave permission, and ordered it...

Conclusion

There my brothers and sisters were dozens and dozens of references, not from me, but from your Sheikhs, your Imams! They aren't me quoting, and it's quite clear, after all that research, that really, Hazrat Umer performed this Bid'at first, and said it afterwards, that don't recite this, it's Bid'at, I appologise, yet we see our Sunni brothers not addmiting it's a Bid'at, given birth by Hazrat Umer himself...

Not to only note that, but also the fact that adding Hayyala Khayril Amal in the Adhaan, isn't Bid'at, likewise the addition of Hazrat Umer, and that's a point to note, as we Shias, recite this in our Adhaan with great repute and pleasure, as it's a Sunnat, performed by your great Ahadith narrator, and also, orriginally Sunnat-e-Muhammed!

Allah, forgive us all, for our bad sins...